OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 22, 2014, 05:22:01 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Poll
Question: Do you believe that the acount of genesis in the Old testament should be taken literally?
Yes - 54 (15.6%)
No - 134 (38.7%)
both metaphorically and literally - 158 (45.7%)
Total Voters: 346

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy  (Read 348811 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.
GabrieltheCelt
Hillbilly Extraordinaire
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 7,003


Chasin' down a Hoodoo...


« Reply #720 on: July 19, 2008, 03:47:59 PM »

Maybe not, as I implied earlier, but a biologist can at least offer a scientific viewpoint on the origins of life, even if it is nothing more than speculation.
People don't need speculations though, do they?

However, if one is going to use scientific concepts to pontificate on the science of a particular point of view, then that person had better know what he's talking about.
'Cause you're here to swiftly administer justice, huh Peter?

There's nothing ad hominem about this.
If you say so, Peter.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2008, 03:58:16 PM by GabrieltheCelt » Logged

"The Scots-Irish; Brewed in Scotland, bottled in Ireland, uncorked in America."  ~Scots-Irish saying
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,170


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #721 on: July 19, 2008, 04:01:50 PM »

People don't need speculations though, do they?
But maybe a biologist could at least define for us what evolutionary theory is qualified to say about the origins of life and what evolutionary theory is NOT qualified to say, as opposed to this accusation leveled against evolutionists:

The current theory in fashion is that somehow, in the primordial soup, a bolt of lightning struck a bunch of oxygen, carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen, and a few sulfur atoms... and they magically combined randomly to form amino acids.

...

So, I admire the evolutionists. Their faith is every bit as powerful as the believers!  Wink
« Last Edit: July 19, 2008, 04:07:39 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #722 on: July 19, 2008, 04:14:51 PM »

Seems more cosmology to me.

Which is generally regarded as a subfield of astrophysics or at least that's the opinion of all the astrophysicists I've known. However, the one Mathematical Physicist I knew thought it to be a sub-field of Mathematical Physics, but he ultimately thought this of all the hard sciences from Physics to Chemistry to Biology to Ecology...so go figure.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
GabrieltheCelt
Hillbilly Extraordinaire
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 7,003


Chasin' down a Hoodoo...


« Reply #723 on: July 19, 2008, 04:40:25 PM »

But maybe a biologist could at least define for us what evolutionary theory is qualified to say about the origins of life and what evolutionary theory is NOT qualified to say, as opposed to this accusation leveled against evolutionists:

I think the accusation leveled might hold up against some evolutionists because I doubt the word 'evolutionist' is recognized by scientists because it seems to be a word with political connotations as it's usually prefaced with 'theistic' or 'atheistic'.  This would seem to help make my point that this whole topic is pointless.  So, to put my money where my mouth is, I'll have no more to say on this thread.
Logged

"The Scots-Irish; Brewed in Scotland, bottled in Ireland, uncorked in America."  ~Scots-Irish saying
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #724 on: July 19, 2008, 05:33:03 PM »

I think the accusation leveled might hold up against some evolutionists because I doubt the word 'evolutionist' is recognized by scientists because it seems to be a word with political connotations as it's usually prefaced with 'theistic' or 'atheistic'.  This would seem to help make my point that this whole topic is pointless.  So, to put my money where my mouth is, I'll have no more to say on this thread.

No, most scientists wouldn't call themselves 'evolutionists' just as they wouldn't call themselves 'electromagneticists'...it's expected that a scientist would accept evolution just as they would accept electromagnetic theory, failure to do so without presenting overwhelming and groundbreaking never before published evidence to the contrary would simply demonstrate their incompetence and lack of qualification for their position. In science, the ability to objectively evaluate evidence and arrive at a rational conclusion based on the objective evidence is pretty much the most fundamental of required qualifications.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,381



« Reply #725 on: July 20, 2008, 01:03:03 AM »

Another excellent source from the man who conceived the inflationary paradigm:

So, how does inflationary theory solve the horizon problem?  Inflationary theory allows the universe to have been much smaller than the classic Big Bang theory postulates, allowing the universe to achieve thermal isotropy (homogeneity) very easily before its phase of most rapid expansion made further heat transfer from one side to the other impossible.

Actually this is just one of many theories. This happens to be the predominant one. 
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,381



« Reply #726 on: July 20, 2008, 01:18:39 AM »

But maybe a biologist could at least define for us what evolutionary theory is qualified to say about the origins of life and what evolutionary theory is NOT qualified to say, as opposed to this accusation leveled against evolutionists:

Origins of life are from god or not from god. The battle will wage on until the answer is given.

Scientists aren't the problem. Everybody wants to be sure of everything. The only thing sure is death and taxes. Wink
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,170


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #727 on: July 20, 2008, 02:52:08 AM »

Actually this is just one of many theories. This happens to be the predominant one. 
Probably because it has the most evidence to support it. Wink  One of the marks of a good scientific theory is that you can make predictions from the theory and the predicted phenomena actually occur as predicted.

Scientists aren't the problem. Everybody wants to be sure of everything. The only thing sure is death and taxes. Wink
And even of death we can't be sure. Wink
« Last Edit: July 20, 2008, 03:04:43 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,381



« Reply #728 on: July 20, 2008, 10:42:13 AM »

Probably because it has the most evidence to support it. Wink  One of the marks of a good scientific theory is that you can make predictions from the theory and the predicted phenomena actually occur as predicted.
Theorizing is, for all intense and purposes. Guessing. Roll Eyes

Quote
And even of death we can't be sure. Wink

I would say it's the latter that one can't be sure of. Wink
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,170


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #729 on: July 20, 2008, 04:04:01 PM »

Theorizing is, for all intense and purposes. Guessing. Roll Eyes
No.  Hypothesizing is guessing; theorizing is testing the guess. Wink
Logged
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #730 on: July 20, 2008, 07:13:55 PM »

No, most scientists wouldn't call themselves 'evolutionists' just as they wouldn't call themselves 'electromagneticists'...it's expected that a scientist would accept evolution just as they would accept electromagnetic theory, failure to do so without presenting overwhelming and groundbreaking never before published evidence to the contrary would simply demonstrate their incompetence and lack of qualification for their position. In science, the ability to objectively evaluate evidence and arrive at a rational conclusion based on the objective evidence is pretty much the most fundamental of required qualifications.
Post of the Month nominee for an outstanding, well-reasoned, easily understandable, and badly needed definition.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,441



« Reply #731 on: July 21, 2008, 12:39:04 PM »

Theorizing is, for all intense and purposes. Guessing. Roll Eyes

"Guessing"?  It's not "guessing" to take something that is known, real data about something, and make a hypothesis that might fit with what is known.  Guessing doesn't have to have any true information or reality behind it; it can be a 'flight of fancy'.  In the sciences a hypothesis is tested, there are experiments and the collection of more data, more real information about what happens, what results, what works and can it be repeated. 

Ebor 
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,441



« Reply #732 on: July 21, 2008, 12:47:40 PM »

People don't need speculations though, do they?

We don't?  Speculation, the making and testing of hypothesis have had some wonderful results and advances for Humanity.  It was speculation on Edward Jenner's part as to why milkmaids didn't get smallpox that led him to try vaccination.  Thanks to that and the multitude of people who've worked with finding vaccines for other diseases it has improved, protected and prolonged the lives of millions upon millions of people. 

That's just one example.  So yes, for my part, People DO need speculations.

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,381



« Reply #733 on: July 21, 2008, 04:17:14 PM »

"Guessing"?  It's not "guessing" to take something that is known, real data about something, and make a hypothesis that might fit with what is known.  Guessing doesn't have to have any true information or reality behind it; it can be a 'flight of fancy'.  In the sciences a hypothesis is tested, there are experiments and the collection of more data, more real information about what happens, what results, what works and can it be repeated. 

Ebor 
Show me the observable data and I will agree with you hands down. Lips Sealed
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #734 on: July 21, 2008, 04:23:49 PM »

Show me the observable data and I will agree with you hands down. Lips Sealed
Here it is, direct from a scientist who observed it. Enjoy.

Available in a free ebook download here: http://ebooksdownloads.blogspot.com/2007/10/origin-of-species.html
« Last Edit: July 21, 2008, 04:24:41 PM by ytterbiumanalyst » Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,381



« Reply #735 on: July 21, 2008, 04:44:37 PM »

Here it is, direct from a scientist who observed it. Enjoy.

He observed the change from ape too man. Interesting, But not true. All he observed was birds that changed colors. Wooa, we have a winner. Wink
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
chrevbel
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 708



« Reply #736 on: July 22, 2008, 02:50:43 PM »

Show me the observable data and I will agree with you hands down.
Endogenous retroviruses.  No explanation I've heard makes sense except evolution.  Nothing else explains their patterns.  (To me, anyway -- But I'm always open to a new hypothesis.)
Logged
zoarthegleaner
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 398



« Reply #737 on: July 22, 2008, 08:03:46 PM »

"If God wants to use lightning on amino acids to create the universe, and explain it to the Israelites as "dust," He has the power to do that."

Excuse me, where did God get His Lightning if He needed it to kick start the Universe? 

Did our Lord make mud eyeballs for the blind man born without eyeballs or did He simply heal what was already there?   I would think that if the former, the choice to explain "dust" to the Israelites was adequate, since mud balls can become eyeballs, but if the latter is true...

zoarthegleaner

Logged

Courteous is my name,
and I have always aimed to live up to it.
Grace is also my name,
but when things go wrong
its Courteous whom I blame;
but its Grace who sees me through it.
antiderivative
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Northeastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: A jurisdiction
Posts: 349


« Reply #738 on: August 09, 2008, 03:19:04 PM »

What is ultimately bizarre about evolution is there is both overwhelming evidence against it, and overwhelming evidence for it. Since that sentence probably made no sense to you, I would personally conclude that evolution is a developing theory that at present, has many flaws. To my understanding, the 7 day creation can be both interpreted metaphorically, or literally (in the Orthodox Church), depending on the individual, but whichever is right, it is irrelevant to the faith. It is more of scientific argument than a theological one, and the church shouldn't try to get involved in science, since ecclesiastical involvement is a blatant integration of rationalism and theology.

I've spent most of my life in a hard core Protestant school, which was big on Creationism vs. Evolution, and that anything else besides the literal interpretation was heresy. Although I didn't realize it, it was the result of trying to turn the Bible into a science textbook. I remember being taught that dinosaurs were actually not extinct, and somehow that disproved evolution.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2008, 03:23:24 PM by antiderivative » Logged

signature
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #739 on: August 09, 2008, 11:35:42 PM »

I had responded to this post before the Great Crash of '08, but it's been lost. I will attempt to re-reply.

He observed the change from ape too man. Interesting, But not true. All he observed was birds that changed colors. Wooa, we have a winner. Wink
Of course he didn't see that particular change, but it doesn't matter. He did observe evolution in action--by observing populations of birds adapting to a changing environment. But you'll never see that as long as you remain convinced that because Darwin's theory does not fit into your preconceived idea of how the world was created, he must have been completely wrong. This blatant anti-intellectualism is only going to serve to alienate thinking people from Christianity. Academic folk do not become atheists because Christianity is unreasonable; they give up religion because Christians are unreasonable and cannot admit that they do not know everything.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
Pravoslavbob
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,194


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #740 on: August 11, 2008, 02:28:23 AM »

I had responded to this post before the Great Crash of '08, but it's been lost. I will attempt to re-reply.
Of course he didn't see that particular change, but it doesn't matter. He did observe evolution in action--by observing populations of birds adapting to a changing environment. But you'll never see that as long as you remain convinced that because Darwin's theory does not fit into your preconceived idea of how the world was created, he must have been completely wrong. This blatant anti-intellectualism is only going to serve to alienate thinking people from Christianity. Academic folk do not become atheists because Christianity is unreasonable; they give up religion because Christians are unreasonable and cannot admit that they do not know everything.

IMHO, the best post on this thread in weeks! 
Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
zoarthegleaner
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 398



« Reply #741 on: September 08, 2008, 08:00:45 PM »

He did observe evolution in action  Of course anyone having read Gould on Darwin knows that Darwin denied observing evoultion in action.
Logged

Courteous is my name,
and I have always aimed to live up to it.
Grace is also my name,
but when things go wrong
its Courteous whom I blame;
but its Grace who sees me through it.
DanM
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 249


« Reply #742 on: September 08, 2008, 08:31:57 PM »

Of course anyone having read Gould on Darwin knows that Darwin denied observing evoultion in action.

Here is a letter I wrote to the editor.  I am very sure it was not published.

INCIPIT  Instead of teaching what evolution is not (as Amy Binder and John Evans propose in “Teach what evolution is not:  A model for morality,” RG, August 3, 2008), it is much better to teach what it is:  a result of  inductive logic, i.e., an attempt to reason from particular details to universal laws.  If this theory is divested of a certain religious aura and presented as a creature of inductive reasoning, there is no reason that it cannot be taught without controversy in the most obscurantist classrooms.  FINITUR

If I were to write it now, I would refer readers to 19th century Jesuit manuals of logic for clarification on inductive or material logic.
DanM
Logged
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,381



« Reply #743 on: September 10, 2008, 10:15:01 PM »

Breaking news. The mega machine, "Hadron Collider" that was built to prove or disprove a deity. Is now on line. http://press.web.cern.ch/press/PressReleases/Releases2008/PR08.08E.html
 We should know if god exists in a about a year or so.
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,170


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #744 on: September 10, 2008, 10:55:13 PM »

Breaking news. The mega machine, "Hadron Collider" that was built to prove or disprove a deity. Is now on line. http://press.web.cern.ch/press/PressReleases/Releases2008/PR08.08E.html
 We should know if god exists in a about a year or so.
Yeah, we know.  We're currently discussing this event here:  LHC Initial Success.

Now, what this has to do with evolution is anybody's guess.
Logged
Acolyte
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Jurisdictionalism is sin.
Posts: 202



« Reply #745 on: September 30, 2008, 08:24:43 PM »

If God created Adam in a state of maturity, He could have done the same for the universe.
When Jesus turned water into wine, it had the appearance of grapes grown to maturation, squashed into grape juice, and fermented into alcohol. This He did in an instant. Those who were unaware of this miracle believed that it was normal wine, just as those who don't believe in a literal understanding of Genesis believe the earth is much older than what it says. While I don't believe that a young earth belief is required by Scripture or Christian faith, there are possible alternative explanations for scientific discoveries that conflict with the traditional understanding of Genesis.
Logged
chrevbel
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 708



« Reply #746 on: February 13, 2009, 07:23:06 AM »

If God created Adam in a state of maturity, He could have done the same for the universe.
When Jesus turned water into wine, it had the appearance of grapes grown to maturation, squashed into grape juice, and fermented into alcohol. This He did in an instant.
Acknowledged.  However, these examples miss an important point.  If we had photographs of Adam as a young boy, if we had his grade school report cards, and if we had his childhood immunization records from the hospital, then we would quite rightly say "Hey, this is inconsistent with the view that he was created instantly as a mature man with no history."  And if the wine at the wedding had been served in bottles marked "Vintage A.D. 24", then likewise we would be right in wondering whether the wine did, in fact, have a history.

This is exactly the situation with the universe.  We have photographs of a universe from before there was a universe.  So we ponder the inconsistency and try to address it.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #747 on: February 13, 2009, 07:47:49 AM »

If God created Adam in a state of maturity, He could have done the same for the universe.
When Jesus turned water into wine, it had the appearance of grapes grown to maturation, squashed into grape juice, and fermented into alcohol. This He did in an instant.
Acknowledged.  However, these examples miss an important point.  If we had photographs of Adam as a young boy, if we had his grade school report cards, and if we had his childhood immunization records from the hospital, then we would quite rightly say "Hey, this is inconsistent with the view that he was created instantly as a mature man with no history."  And if the wine at the wedding had been served in bottles marked "Vintage A.D. 24", then likewise we would be right in wondering whether the wine did, in fact, have a history.

This is exactly the situation with the universe.  We have photographs of a universe from before there was a universe.  So we ponder the inconsistency and try to address it.

I know that all photographs in space are of space long ago (because of light speed) but photographs are you talking about that are "before there was a universe."

Btw, since A.D. was invented until over 4 centuries past the wedding at Cana, I'd look elsewhere to fraud.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
chrevbel
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 708



« Reply #748 on: February 13, 2009, 08:27:15 AM »

I'd look elsewhere to fraud.

Wow.  I intentionally worded my examples to preclude the possibility of anyone taking them literally.  I meant them only to illustrate a point.  Even so, I guess my point remained too subtle.  My apologies.  Forget it.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #749 on: February 13, 2009, 08:39:52 AM »

I'd look elsewhere to fraud.

Wow.  I intentionally worded my examples to preclude the possibility of anyone taking them literally.  I meant them only to illustrate a point.  Even so, I guess my point remained too subtle.  My apologies.  Forget it.
LOL.  My, aren't we the sensitive type.

I teach history, and it amazes me how commonly no one sees the immediate anachronism of anything being B.C. having a B.C. date.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
zoarthegleaner
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 398



« Reply #750 on: February 14, 2009, 10:49:49 PM »

Name it, claim it.
Logged

Courteous is my name,
and I have always aimed to live up to it.
Grace is also my name,
but when things go wrong
its Courteous whom I blame;
but its Grace who sees me through it.
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #751 on: April 07, 2009, 10:19:50 PM »

methinks the ECF's are the best place to look for a proper understanding of Genesis. Their concensus is that Genesis is indeed literal. The Church even uses a calendar that says that we are now in the 8th millennium from the creation of the world. Also, there is a canon from the Council of Carthage which was later ratified by the 7th Ecumenical Council (I think  7th) that basically says that if you dont believe in a literal Adam and Eve you are to be anathematized. Since evolution supposedly happens in populations there could not have been only 2 humans so Adam and Eve must be seen as allegorical for all of mankind.
Logged
Jetavan
Argumentum ad australopithecum
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Science to the Fourth Power
Jurisdiction: Ohayo Gozaimasu
Posts: 6,580


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #752 on: April 07, 2009, 10:49:13 PM »

Since evolution supposedly happens in populations there could not have been only 2 humans so Adam and Eve must be seen as allegorical for all of mankind.

Not necessarily. Depending upon how one defines "human", it is possible that within a population of pre-humans, the first one or two "true humans" were born.
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #753 on: April 10, 2009, 05:07:43 PM »



Not necessarily. Depending upon how one defines "human", it is possible that within a population of pre-humans, the first one or two "true humans" were born.

how would you define human to make this possible? im not exactly sure what you're saying by that.
Logged
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #754 on: April 10, 2009, 06:06:36 PM »



Not necessarily. Depending upon how one defines "human", it is possible that within a population of pre-humans, the first one or two "true humans" were born.

how would you define human to make this possible? im not exactly sure what you're saying by that.

Me too. From the point of view of pure biology, "first humans," "first oaks," "first amoebas," etc. is nonsense. The evolution of life simply doesn't work that way. Two divergently evolving populations become two truly separate biological species very slowly and inconspicuously, so that there is no single "defining moment" when the new species (including Homo sapiens) is "born."
Logged

Love never fails.
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #755 on: April 16, 2009, 02:12:45 PM »



Not necessarily. Depending upon how one defines "human", it is possible that within a population of pre-humans, the first one or two "true humans" were born.

how would you define human to make this possible? im not exactly sure what you're saying by that.

Me too. From the point of view of pure biology, "first humans," "first oaks," "first amoebas," etc. is nonsense. The evolution of life simply doesn't work that way. Two divergently evolving populations become two truly separate biological species very slowly and inconspicuously, so that there is no single "defining moment" when the new species (including Homo sapiens) is "born."


so then the image of God is something that can be slowly evolved into, and then presumably slowly evolved out of? so there will be creatures out there or were creatures out there who are only partially the image of God?
Logged
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #756 on: April 16, 2009, 03:03:13 PM »



Not necessarily. Depending upon how one defines "human", it is possible that within a population of pre-humans, the first one or two "true humans" were born.

how would you define human to make this possible? im not exactly sure what you're saying by that.

Me too. From the point of view of pure biology, "first humans," "first oaks," "first amoebas," etc. is nonsense. The evolution of life simply doesn't work that way. Two divergently evolving populations become two truly separate biological species very slowly and inconspicuously, so that there is no single "defining moment" when the new species (including Homo sapiens) is "born."


so then the image of God is something that can be slowly evolved into, and then presumably slowly evolved out of? so there will be creatures out there or were creatures out there who are only partially the image of God?

The image of God has nothing to do with the biological part of us. Biologically speaking, we are beasts.
Logged

Love never fails.
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #757 on: April 23, 2009, 07:34:45 PM »



Not necessarily. Depending upon how one defines "human", it is possible that within a population of pre-humans, the first one or two "true humans" were born.

how would you define human to make this possible? im not exactly sure what you're saying by that.

Me too. From the point of view of pure biology, "first humans," "first oaks," "first amoebas," etc. is nonsense. The evolution of life simply doesn't work that way. Two divergently evolving populations become two truly separate biological species very slowly and inconspicuously, so that there is no single "defining moment" when the new species (including Homo sapiens) is "born."


so then the image of God is something that can be slowly evolved into, and then presumably slowly evolved out of? so there will be creatures out there or were creatures out there who are only partially the image of God?

The image of God has nothing to do with the biological part of us. Biologically speaking, we are beasts.

The image of God is about the whole man........not just the soul. And even now, we are more than just mere beasts. We are not mini machines looking back at itself (the universe).

We are self aware in a way that is different from other biological creatures on the planet.






JNORM888
« Last Edit: April 23, 2009, 07:35:19 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #758 on: April 23, 2009, 07:45:13 PM »



Not necessarily. Depending upon how one defines "human", it is possible that within a population of pre-humans, the first one or two "true humans" were born.

how would you define human to make this possible? im not exactly sure what you're saying by that.

Me too. From the point of view of pure biology, "first humans," "first oaks," "first amoebas," etc. is nonsense. The evolution of life simply doesn't work that way. Two divergently evolving populations become two truly separate biological species very slowly and inconspicuously, so that there is no single "defining moment" when the new species (including Homo sapiens) is "born."

If that was the case then how can all humans wordwide procreate with one another? There has to be "first humans" somewhere or else we all would be different in the sense of pro-creation.

Also you seem very dogmatic about something you "can't" observe. Yes we evolve slowly as human beings. Religion evolves slowly too, but Christianity will never evolve into Islam, and Islam will never evolve into Buddhism.

To assume that humans worldwide evolved from different monkeys worldwide is a belief you shouldn't be dogmatic about. For how can all humans pro-create if we all came from different monkeys?

And how can we all pro-create if "evolution" is mindless? In school we were forced fed that evolution was progressive, but why can't it be regressive? why can't we believe in "devolution"? Why can't evolution be "relative" according to the observer? For what may be evolution to you might be devolution to somone else.





JNORM888
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Jetavan
Argumentum ad australopithecum
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Science to the Fourth Power
Jurisdiction: Ohayo Gozaimasu
Posts: 6,580


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #759 on: April 23, 2009, 08:55:39 PM »



Not necessarily. Depending upon how one defines "human", it is possible that within a population of pre-humans, the first one or two "true humans" were born.

how would you define human to make this possible? im not exactly sure what you're saying by that.

Me too. From the point of view of pure biology, "first humans," "first oaks," "first amoebas," etc. is nonsense. The evolution of life simply doesn't work that way. Two divergently evolving populations become two truly separate biological species very slowly and inconspicuously, so that there is no single "defining moment" when the new species (including Homo sapiens) is "born."

Again, that depends upon how one defines what Homo sapiens is. One could define sapiens as possessing a particular genetic profile. Such a definition would involve a degree of arbitrariness, true, but it would be one possible definition.
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,978


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #760 on: April 25, 2009, 07:17:33 PM »

Quote
Also you seem very dogmatic about something you "can't" observe.

That's like telling a 15th Century cartographer that he's very dogmatic about his maps of something he can't view from aerial distance.

The Church fathers (and St. Paul) are clear that humanity has a nature similar to animals and a nature similar to angels, two natures in one.  The Bible teaches us we were made from dust, just like the land animals, while being breathed into.  The "Image of God" according to St. Athanasius is the special something we have that are different from animals, not the whole of humanity.

God bless.
« Last Edit: April 25, 2009, 07:19:49 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #761 on: April 26, 2009, 09:57:29 PM »

and the Church Fathers are also clear that our formation from dust and the in-breathing of our soul was instantaneous, not a process requiring millions of years. We can't trust them on one point and throw 'em out the window on the next.

also St. Gregory Palamas says in his 150 Chapters in chap. 38:

it is shown to men of understanding that man's spirit, the life-giving power in his body, is intellectual love; it is from the mind and the word, and exists in the word and the mind, and possesses both the word and the mind within itself Through it the soul naturally possesses such a bond of love with its own body that it never wishes to leave it and will not do so at all unless force is brought to bear on it externally from some very serious disease or trauma.

he would seem to say that the image of  God definitely involves the body, which is naturally connected to the soul -- not something implanted into a body that has been in the works for millions of years.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,170


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #762 on: April 26, 2009, 11:05:15 PM »

and the Church Fathers are also clear that our formation from dust and the in-breathing of our soul was instantaneous, not a process requiring millions of years. We can't trust them on one point and throw 'em out the window on the next.
Which Fathers?
Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #763 on: April 26, 2009, 11:24:19 PM »

and the Church Fathers are also clear that our formation from dust and the in-breathing of our soul was instantaneous, not a process requiring millions of years. We can't trust them on one point and throw 'em out the window on the next.
Which Fathers?

Papa John.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Alveus Lacuna
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,968



« Reply #764 on: April 27, 2009, 12:13:17 AM »

Papa John.



Great pizza!

But is it the product of evolution?!?!
« Last Edit: April 27, 2009, 12:13:47 AM by Alveus Lacuna » Logged
Tags: science Theory of Evolution evolution creationism cheval mort 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 »   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.17 seconds with 75 queries.